Anti-abortion bill notes have 'JESUS + Mary' message

Kansas Gov. Brownback signs sweeping legislation Friday

Clicking on the above photo will enlarge the view of anti-abortion legislation, left, sitting on a desk in Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback's ceremonial office before he signed it Friday at the Statehouse. At right is a page of Brownback's notes about the measure with "JESUS + Mary" written at the top. Further down the page are typewritten notes spelling out Brownback's belief that the bill would create "a culture of life" in Kansas.

Related Stories

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed sweeping anti-abortion legislation Friday, giving his state a new law to block tax breaks for abortion providers, ban sex-selection abortions and declare that life begins “at fertilization.”

Many provisions take effect in July, though the tax changes will be effective for 2014. The measure cleared the Republican-dominated Legislature by wide margins earlier this month.

The GOP governor is a strong abortion opponent who urged lawmakers to create “a culture of life” after taking office in January 2011.

“All human life is sacred. It’s beautiful,” Brownback said just before signing the measure, flanked by abortion opponents. “With this, we continue to build this culture of life in our state.”

An Associated Press photograph taken before the signing shows a page of notes about the bill on Brownback’s desk that included a handwritten message at the top: “JESUS + Mary.” Further down the page were typewritten notes spelling out Brownback’s belief that the bill would create “a culture of life.”

Supporters of the new law contend it will lessen taxpayers’ entanglement with abortion and declare the state’s intent to protect life at all stages. The measure isn’t as restrictive as laws enacted this year in North Dakota and Arkansas to ban abortions even early in pregnancy, but abortion-rights supporters still believe it will significantly restrict access to abortion services.

The bill also prohibits abortion providers from being involved in public school sex education classes and spells out in more detail what information doctors must provide to patients seeking abortions.

The new law’s language that life begins “at fertilization” worries some abortion-rights supporters, who believe it could be used to legally harass providers with lawsuits.

Peter Brownlie, president and chief executive officer of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, which performs abortions at its Overland Park clinic, called the new law “extreme.”

“Politicians should not be involved in a woman’s personal medical decisions about her pregnancy,” he said in a statement. “Let’s let real physicians practice medicine — not the ‘pretend doctors’ in the Statehouse.”

But abortion opponents call the fertilization language a statement of principle and not an outright ban on terminating pregnancies. The new law specifically notes that any rights suggested by the language are limited by decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court protecting access to abortion.

In contrast, a new North Dakota law bans abortions as early as the sixth week of pregnancy, and a new Arkansas law prohibits most abortions after the 12th week.

Kansans for Life, the most influential anti-abortion group at the Statehouse, has argued against pursuing such proposals in favor of less dramatic changes that are more likely to hold up in court.

The provisions in the new Kansas law dealing with tax breaks are designed to prevent the state from subsidizing abortions, even indirectly. For example, health care providers don’t have to pay the state sales tax on items they purchase, but the bill would deny that tax break to abortion providers. Also, a woman couldn’t include abortion costs if she deducts medical expenses on her income taxes.

Lawmakers moved to ban abortions that are prompted by the baby’s gender without any solid data on how many sex-selection procedures are performed in Kansas. A 2008 study by two Columbia University economists suggested the practice of aborting female fetuses — widespread in some nations where parents traditionally prefer sons — is performed in the U.S. on a limited basis.

But legislators on both sides of the issue said the practice should be banned, regardless of how frequently it occurs.

The bill also would require physicians to give women information that addresses breast cancer as a potential risk of abortion.

Advocates on both sides acknowledge there is medical evidence that carrying a fetus to term can lower a woman’s risk for breast cancer, but doctors convened by the National Cancer Institute a decade ago concluded that abortion doesn’t raise the risk for developing the disease.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of
civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site.
Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate
language, but readers might find some comments offensive or
inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the
"Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

The latest spewing of unconstitutional anti-abortion insanity by the Kansas legislature that will cost Kansas taxpayers another several hundred thousand dollars to defend in Federal Court has now been signed by the dishonorable governor.

Victorian times indeed: the misguided bill seeks to place into the law a declaration that life begins at fertilization (directly contravening the United States Supreme Court), banning abortion clinic volunteers from participating in sex education classes in public schools and eliminating state tax breaks for clinics performing abortions.

I still don't understand, I didn't think you could tell the gender until about 20 weeks, and isn't that too late to have an abortion? When this study was done on women aborting female fetuses, how is that accurate, I don't know how many women would honestly say that was the reason. How could they ever prove that one?

The new law’s language that life begins “at fertilization” worries some contraception-rights supporters, too. Will the yesislature next decide that IUDs are illegal because they interfere with implantation of the fertilized egg? The governor's church also opposes contraception.

How funny. You think Brownback wants to return to the 1960s yet when it comes to taxes, I am always hearing how liberals want income tax rates to return to the levels in the 1960s and 70s levels. Convenient how that works.

Unfortunately, with this Gov. and legislature there are going to be even more of these days. Women, your days as equals has come to an end. Big brother Kansas is going to watch over
your every move and try to keep you 'in your place'. BIG changes need to occur in the next election.

the comments if all you haters lived in Arkansas or North Dakota. Oh how I wished we wold have passed their abortion laws here in Kansas.
JUNKG: There has been nobody murdered in Kansas under the death penalty since back in the 1960's. There have been very few that are setting on death row that have even had their number called. There will be no murders in Kansas via the dealth penalty. Quit using it as an excuse to bash on the Governor.
mr_happy: You have to stop dreaming, or seek medical help. I am considered "poor" based upon my income and I have benefitted from GOV Brownback. My taxes(on the State side) have gone down. Now if you want to talk Federal and Osama Obama, yes my taxes have gone up and he has done nothing for me, the poor, the country. You say he "WANTS" hundreds of thousands to go without insurance. that's a lie. He(along with MANY) other States refused to adopt the crappy OBAMACARE package, which I support the Gov on that one. It has become law and for the States that refuse, the Gov will come in and "set it up" if you will. Where ar they? He cares. You just spew lies from your hatred. You seem like you belong on CNN or MSNBC or any of the liberal TV stations that HATE all Republicans and want to strip us of our right to think or speak......

you didn't give up your right to speak - that's for sure. Too bad the thought process is not at home. This governor seems to be ruled by a twisted faith concept, and intends to rule Kansas by that concept, regardless of the church-state separation idea. JESUS + MARY, ??? C'mon, what's that mean, anyway? And another thing, if every life was so sacred, why doesn't he institute caring educational and child health support programs AFTER birth?

A just-released Kansas Health Institute analysis of Kansas’ uninsured population appears to buttress arguments both for expanding state Medicaid coverage for low-income Kansans and for the health insurance mandate that is the core of the controversial Affordable Care Act – a.k.a. “Obamacare.”

Not surprisingly, the analysis shows, Kansans with low incomes are more likely not to have health insurance. However, the surprise in the report is that more than two-thirds of Kansas families without health insurance are not classified as poor by federal standards.

The federal poverty level probably is the source of some of the seeming contradiction. Set at just $22,000 a year for a family of four, it wouldn’t be any wonder that even above that many families wouldn’t be able to afford health insurance – unless they are working, in which case presumably affordable health insurance would be available from the employer.

While most would agree the federal poverty level is set extremely low, they might also be surprised to know that eligibility for Medicaid in Kansas is set well below that. Parents in families must make below 32 percent of the federal poverty level – about $7,000 a year for a family of four – to get on Medicaid. And childless adults don’t qualify at all unless they are disabled.

Given that, it seems extreme that so many legislators and Gov. Sam Brownback are balking at raising Medicaid eligibility to 138 percent of the federal poverty level – about $30,000 a year for a family of four – a move that would expand coverage to 315,000 low-income Kansans, according to the KHI report. The federal government would pay for most of the cost of the expansion, but the governor and legislators are considering denying the federal money for this, primarily out of political spite for “Obamacare.”

That would be a huge disservice to low-income Kansans. Moreover, the KHI data paints a picture of a health insurance coverage problem that needs to be fixed. Insuring more low-income people is one fix. The other is the mandate that all Americans have health insurance, much in the way that all licensed auto drivers be insured.

Not all of the uninsured are poverty-stricken. Many are just people who don’t want to pay for health insurance, even if they can afford it.

A big reason may be they aren’t worried about serious health problems. The KHI analysis shows that people who are uninsured are more likely young – aged 19 to 44 – which may suggest relative healthiness. But obesity and its companion health factors know no age restriction.

And, the study found, the rate of uninsured is high among the Hispanic population.

The individual mandate would address pockets of the uninsured population that aren’t covered because of affordability.

Those who aren’t covered by employer health-care plans may work only part time or for a small company that doesn’t offer health insurance. So that’s where the health insurance exchange comes into play – a place where people can shop for health insurance plans.

But despite the logic of that, Brownback – once again, out of political spite – declined the opportunity for Kansas to fashion its own exchange.

The KHI report breaks down the pattern of gaps in health insurance coverage. State leaders can’t simply be against the solutions in the Affordable Care Act that are designed to close those gaps. If they are going to turn away from the federal solutions, they need to have alternatives of their own.

If there was ever any doubt that Brownback wants to impose his religious views on the people of this state, ponder for a moment the "Jesus + Mary" message of his on this bill. May we remind each other that there is NO FEDERAL or STATE RELIGION in the United State. Never has been, never will be. If you want to see what a state religion is, research Saudi Arabia. Making laws in the name of Jesus and Mary are precisely what our constitution prohibits.

of a "note sitting on Brownback's desk". It was not a picture of our governor writing it, reading it, or holding it. Anyone can put a piece of paper on a desk and take a picture. I'm all for what our governor does, so this note doesn't bother me at all. But come on...... anyone could have sat that note on that desk and taken a picture. He's not even sitting at that desk when the picture was taken.

It is good to see Mr. Brownback stand for what it right in the face of all the xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
oppositiion. Babies are innocent, criminals have grown up and CHOSEN their way of life and if that ends up in gas chamber or electric chair that was their CHOICE.

To say that if you oppose abortion you have to oppose the death penalty is so strange to me. How many babies in the womb have been a threat to others in society? If there is a threat to mother's physical health then yes do what it takes.

Most people given the sentence of death penalty now usually have done really harmful things to others in society. But if we could insure they would never be turned loose on society or allowed to be in a postion where they could harm others might be enough.

I am not a great fan of Mr Blackheart and I think he is dangerous to anyone without money or power. But to always have someone say if you believe abortion is wrong you have to think death penalty is wrong is trying to force their belief down my throat just as much as he is.